Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
This communication is in response to the application filed on 01/21/2025.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined.
The IDS received on 04/17/2025 has been considered by the examiner. Claims 1-20 are presented for examination.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
Claims 1-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of no statutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 21-22, 26-27, 30-32, 36-38 and 40-45 of cop ending Application No. 17/623,216. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims in each application are directed to a robotic device based on the online order at least one tote to a refrigerated area of a storage area of the facility if the intended state is a refrigeration state or to a freezer area of the storage area if the intended state is a freezer state.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Ducrou et al. “US 10,482,421 B1” (Ducrou).
Regarding Claim 1: A system comprising:
a robotic device at a facility; and a control circuit configured to: receive an online order (at least see Ducrou Abstract; Fig. 2);
determine, based on items included in the online order, a number of the items that require refrigeration and a number of the items that require freezing (at least see Ducrou Abstract; Fig. 1; 3:1-12); and
transmit, to the robotic device, an instruction, wherein the instruction indicates an intended state for at least one tote corresponding to the online order, wherein the intended state is one of a refrigeration state and a freezer state (at least see Ducrou Abstract; Fig. 1; 2:53-63));
wherein the robotic device transports, or causes transport of, the at least one tote to a refrigerated area of a storage area of the facility if the intended state is a refrigeration state or to a freezer area of the storage area if the intended state is a freezer state (at least see Ducrou Abstract; Fig. 1; 3:1-12).
Regarding Claim 2: The system of claim 1, wherein the control circuit is further configured to: assign to the online order, based on the number of the items requiring refrigeration and the number of the items requiring freezing, a number of totes (at least see Ducrou 10:9-21).
Regarding Claim 3: The system of claim 1, wherein the storage area comprises a first area, a second area, and a third area, wherein the first area is a refrigerated area, the second area is a freezer area, and the third area is an ambient area (at least see Ducrou Abstract; Fig. 210:30-47).
Regarding Claim 4: The system of claim 1, wherein the robotic device is one or more of a robotic arm, a shuttle, a conveyor system, an automated mobile robot (AMR) system, a drone system, and a locker system (at least see Ducrou Fig. 10).
Regarding Claim 5: The system of claim 1, wherein the robotic device is further configured to: transmit, to the control circuit via a communications network upon execution of the instruction, a confirmation message, wherein the confirmation message indicates that the instruction has been executed (at least see Ducrou 3:13-26).
Regarding Claim 6: The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one tote comprises a first set of totes and a second set of totes, wherein the intended state is a refrigeration state for the first set of totes and a freezer state for the second set of totes (at least see Ducrou 7:34-55).
Regarding Claim 7: The system of claim 1, further comprising one or more conveyor mechanisms transporting a first set of totes to the refrigerated area in the storage area and transporting a second set of totes to the freezer area in the storage area (at least see Ducrou 3:35-50).
Regarding Claim 18 The system of claim 7, wherein the robotic device comprises a robotic arm that cooperates with the one or more conveyor mechanisms to direct the first set of totes to the refrigerated area and to direct the second set of totes to the freezer area (at least see Ducrou 18:40-43).
Regarding Claim 9: The system of claim 1, further comprising: an order processing server, wherein the order processing server is configured to receive the online order and transmit, to the control circuit via a communications network, the online order (at least see Ducrou 17:18-26).
Regarding Claim 11: The system of claim 1, wherein the control circuit is further configured to: determine, based on the number of items requiring refrigeration and the number of items requiring freezing, a number of totes required for the online order (at least see Ducrou 21:14-37).
Regarding Claims 12-20: all limitations as recited have been analyzed and rejected with respect to claims 1-11.
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon, which is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, are cited in the Notice of Reference Cited form (PT0-892).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FATEH M OBAID whose telephone number is (571)270-7121. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 A.M to 4:30 P.M.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ryan Zeender can be reached on (571) 272-6790. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/FATEH M OBAID/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627
Prosecution Insights